Male altar servers

[Metanoia02]

I am new here, so this is a good question to guage where I fit in with some of you folks.

My parish has both boys and girls as altar servers. I know I would be shot by most of the parish if I suggested we only have the boys be altar servers.

Okay let's have it. Which side do you come down on.

 

[Credo]

Welcome! I'm new, too!

I, personally, am against female altar servers. I'd like to see it done away with.
The Monsignor at my parish only allows men to be present around the altar during Mass and I highly respect him for this. So, we have a male reader, a male extraordinary minister of the Eucharist, and altar boys only - which, BTW, wear cassocks and surplices, not those tacky off-white robes with cords.

No offense intended to anyone, this is just what I prefer to see during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

 

[Metanoia02]

Welcome! I'm new, too!

I, personally, am against female altar servers. I'd like to see it done away with.
The Monsignor at my parish only allows men to be present around the altar during Mass and I highly respect him for this. So, we have a male reader, a male extraordinary minister of the Eucharist, and altar boys only - which, BTW, wear cassocks and surplices, not those take off-white robes with cords.

No offense intended to anyone, this is just what I prefer to see during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

We are of like minds. Unfortunately I am in a Diocese that still wants to be "fair" to everyone. I have become pretty disatisfied with my parish in particular. We have all the modern stuff. For crying out loud we even have lay people handling the bread (we use real unleavened bread). They actually stand on the altar with the priest and help him break up the bread. Oh well, thanks for letting me vent. It really has been bothering me!

 

[Credo]

An now I'm going to vent a little...my diocese is extremely liberal. At any given Mass you'll find the same behavior of lay persons breaking the bread at the altar, extraordinary ministers taking communion on their own rather than receiving it from the priest, preists leaving the sanctuary to give homilies or the sign of peace, making up their own Creed and/or Eucharistic Prayer, and on and on and on, all of which are forbidden by Liturgical Rubrics....it really disgusts me.
That's why I feel so blessed that one af my aunts brought me to Our Lady of Good Counsel and Monsignor that presides there. He's an extremely devout, traditional, orthodox priest who is very loyal to the Magisterium. If only our bishop would allow him to bring the altar rails back!

OK...enough venting!

 

[JeffreyLloyd]

We have female alter servers, and I don't have a real problem with it.

 

[Dawn Marie]

One of my best friends was an alter server... she's a female. There's nothing wrong with that.

 

[CopticOrthodox]

I've heard that the Catholic Church never intended females to be altar servers, but that Cannon Law just assumed male & so didn't explicitly say otherwise & so they got in on a technicality & once in were in. Is that true or is it just a rumor?

In my Church no one male or female is allowed to serve at the altar unless they're ordained to the minor orders at least, and I like that respect. What was the rational in the Catholic Church behind abolishing the minor orders? I guess there isn't much point to them since thier role in the Liturgy has been cut out, and that's a whole nother discussion.

 

[pax]

The Minor Orders of Acolyte and Lector do still exist, however subdeacons and the minor order of exorcist have been abolished. It is preferred that those serving at the altar have received the minor orders, unfortunately, since the minor orders have a rather limited membership other lay people may be deputed to perform their functions (at least that's how I perceive it).

 

[Metanoia02]

The reason I brought that up is because of my warped sense of reasoning and logic. I view being an atlar server as something that is to be respected and honored. In my parish it is required for those who will be confirmed to serve at the altar. On the surface that may seem like a good thing, giving everyone exposure to the Mass from a hands-on perspective. Unfortunately the result are boys and girls who are simply punching there ticket and could care less about being altar servers. The Liturgy stumbles from one point to the next while inexperienced servers have no idea what they are supposed to be doing.

As I have reflected on the lack of vocations in our Diocese and in the US in general, it has become clear that the Liturgy has become so much the purview of the laity that the priest is shoved to the side or at least out of the main role of the Mass. Who would want to commit to a celabate life and sub-standard income when thier role in the parish is just another person in the Liturgy? Maybe it is just my parish, but the laity has run amuck. The laity has taken on so much of the parish activities that the priest can no longer effectively lead. He simply officiates the sacrements.

I'm done venting

 

[Woodsy]

At my church, what looks to me to be lay people assist with distributing the Eucharist, and they place it in their hands, not in the mouth. Is this right?

 

[Credo]

I, personally, only receive on the tongue, never in my hands. I think it's extremely disrespectful to Jesus to have His Body placed in hands; afterall, it isn't crackers and juice that we're receiving, it's the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord and Savior. I've even received dirty looks from some priests because I won't receive in my hands. (I also only go to someone ordained to receive the Eucharist)
However, it is perfectly valid to receive communion in your hands. I would personally like to see this practice come to an end, but it is acceptable according to the church.
As Fr. Benedict Groeschel once said, receiving the Eucharist in the hand was an experiment that failed. He also said that he will distribute communion in the hand, as he is bound by a vow of obedience, but he does so under protest.

 

[CatholicCrusader1095]

Please note, this is another discipline wrongly altered by Vatican 2. Vatican 2 was an APOSTATE COUNCIL. Previous popes have already judged female altar servers as objectively evil. Please note:

Pope Benedict XIV, Allatae Sunt "Pope Gelasius in his ninth letter to the bihshops of Lucania condemned <B>the evil</B> practice which had been introduced of the women serving the priest at the celebration of Mass. Since this abuse had spread to the Greeks, Innocent VI STRICTLY FORBADE IT IN HIS LETTER TO THE BISHOP OF TUSCULUM: 'Women SHOULD NOT DARE TO SERVE AT THE ALTAR; they should ALTOGETHER BE REFUSED THIS MINISTRY." We too have forbidden this practice in the same words in Our oftrepeated constitution Etsi Pastoralis, sect. 6, no.21"

Let this put the matter to rest. The practice of women serving at the altar is EVIL, because it allows for the heretical idea that women could someday be priests.

 

[CatholicCrusader1095]

We have female alter servers, and I don't have a real problem with it.

Jeffrey you better have a problem with it now in light of the quotation above!

 

[CopticOrthodox]

CatholicCrusader1095, while I personally agree with you that females should not serve at the altar, don't you think that quote is a little out of context since it's from a time when the altar server had a much greater role, so really isn't it talking about another ministry altogether?

 

[CatholicCrusader1095]

CatholicCrusader1095, while I personally agree with you that females should not serve at the altar, don't you think that quote is a little out of context since it's from a time when the altar server had a much greater role, so really isn't it talking about another ministry altogether?

No because the fact of the matter is that ONLY MALE servers were allowed through the Tridentine rite up until Vatican 2, for obviously the same reasons. If there were truly no problem with it, then the Vatican would have allowed it in the early 1900s.

Likewise, please note the following Canon from the Council of Trent. IT IS INFALLIBLY DEFINED THAT NOT EVEN THE POPE can change the Latin Rite of Mass into a new one:

"If anyone says that the RECEIVED and approved rites of the Catholic Church, customarily used in the solemn administration of the Sacraments, can be despised or can be freely omitted by ministers without sin, or CAN BE CHANGED INTO OTHER NEW RITES BY ANY PASTOR IN THE CHURCH WHOMSOEVER, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA"


This is a staggering notion. The rite of the Mass comes from the very apostles, and cannot even be changed by the Pope. The Pope can add things to it that are holy and profound, but he CANNOT CHANGE IT INTO AN OTHER NEW ONE nor can he FREELY OMIT what is previously established.

 

[jukesk9]

I have no problems with female altar servers nor Eucharistic Ministers. They're not priests......

 

[MichaelFJF]

Tribe: At my church, what looks to me to be lay people assist with distributing the Eucharist, and they place it in their hands, not in the mouth. Is this right?

It is appropriate and right - yes.
_______________

CatholicCrusader1095: Please note, this is another discipline wrongly altered by Vatican 2. Vatican 2 was an APOSTATE COUNCIL. Previous popes have already judged female altar servers as objectively evil. Please note:

And we didn't used to let black people vote. Please enter the current century.
M

 

[CatholicCrusader1095]

Tribe: At my church, what looks to me to be lay people assist with distributing the Eucharist, and they place it in their hands, not in the mouth. Is this right?

It is appropriate and right - yes.
_______________

CatholicCrusader1095: Please note, this is another discipline wrongly altered by Vatican 2. Vatican 2 was an APOSTATE COUNCIL. Previous popes have already judged female altar servers as objectively evil. Please note:

And we didn't used to let black people vote. Please enter the current century.
M

You place MODERN PHILOSOPHY BEFORE THE FAITH DELIVERED TO THE APOSTLES. You teach NEW AND INNOVATING DOCTRINES that were CONDEMNED as heretical and evil by the saints and popes. YOU ARE AN HERETIC.

Please note the major fallacy of MichaelFJF. He believes that because something is taught in this century, it must therefore be objectively right. This is the PRECISE opposite of what the Faith teaches. The faith teaches that those things that have been taught ALWAYS are what are right, because they are the things revealed and delivered from the apostles.

VATICAN 1-
Wherefore, by divine and catholic faith all those things are to be believed
which are contained in the word of God as found in scripture and tradition,
and which are proposed by the church as matters to be believed as divinely revealed,
whether by her solemn judgment
or in her ordinary and universal magisterium.


Please note that in Latin ORDINARY means time. We believe what has been taught EVERYWHERE because the Truth does not change. What was Catholic in 1100 is Catholic today. If someone says that what was Catholic in 1100 is NOT the truth today, they do not teach the Faith but a heretical perversion. Michael is no Catholic, he instead worships the innovation of the modern century. It has been PROPOSED BY THE CHURCH that burning heretics at the stake is approved of God. Michael denies dogma.

 

[MichaelFJF]

And your real answer, as revealed in your email to me, is to call me a "****** heretic". Very mature. M

 

[MsAnne]

Quotes from CatholicCrusader1095 directed at MichaelFJF:

"YOU ARE AN HERETIC."
"Please note the major fallacy of MichaelFJF. He believes that because something is taught in this century, it must therefore be objectively right. This is the PRECISE opposite of what the Faith teaches."
"Michael is no Catholic, he instead worships the innovation of the modern century."
- - -

Excuse me???? You can summarize a man, his beliefs, and his character by one statement??
I have no idea how 'Catholic' MichaelFJF is, but as a believer, I am personally insulted that one can be assasinated so freely by the interpretation of one simple quote.

Someone is off base here................ and it doesn't appear to be the one under assault.